Crypto Group Pushes Back on CLARITY Act Bank Plan

TheNewsCryptoPublished on 2026-02-14Last updated on 2026-02-14

Abstract

The Digital Chamber, a crypto trade association, has pushed back against proposals from major U.S. banks in the ongoing debate over the CLARITY Act. While acknowledging the banking sector's concerns about stablecoin yields potentially undermining traditional deposits, the group rejected automatic regulatory rules following a proposed two-year study. CEO Cody Carbone indicated openness to compromise, such as limiting interest-like features, but insisted on preserving incentives for transactions and innovation. Recent White House meetings between industry and banking stakeholders failed to produce an agreement, with both sides maintaining their positions. Patrick Witt of the President’s Council of Advisors warned that the narrowing legislative window before midterm elections adds urgency to reaching a compromise. The core dispute remains whether yield-paying stablecoins threaten financial stability or represent technological progress. With time running out, the fate of the CLARITY Act—which aims to provide regulatory clarity for digital assets—hangs in the balance.

The CLARITY Act debate has intensified after the Digital Chamber released a competing set of principles to challenge proposals backed by major U.S. banks. The blockchain trade association defended the current draft bill while signaling room for compromise on specific issues.

The banking sector has pushed for tighter restrictions, particularly around stablecoin yields. Bank representatives argue that allowing rewards or yield on stablecoins could weaken the traditional deposit system.

The Digital Chamber acknowledged banks’ request for a two-year study on the impact of stablecoins on bank deposits. However, the group rejected any automatic regulatory rulemaking that would follow such a study. CEO Cody Carbone told lawmakers the crypto industry remains open to negotiation, but it will not accept measures that effectively ban innovation.

Carbone emphasized that crypto firms already made concessions by limiting features that resemble traditional interest payments. He stated that the industry is ready to make changes to the static reward for holding, but still wants the flexibility to provide incentives for transactions. The coverage of developments in crypto regulations mentions that the stablecoin rewards are still a sticking point.

White House Meetings Signal Urgency

The recent meetings between the crypto industry and banking stakeholders at the White House did not lead to a final agreement. Both parties showed a willingness to continue negotiations, but there was no significant shift in their stance.

Patrick Witt, executive director of the President’s Council of Advisors for Digital Assets, warned that the legislative window is narrowing. He said that lawmakers need to act swiftly before the focus turns to the campaigns for the midterm elections. Witt called for nimbleness on the part of the crypto industry leaders and the large banks to come to a compromise.

“We’ve hosted numerous meetings and will continue to encourage negotiation,” Witt said in a statement that was made public.

Industry analysts monitoring the situation on WhiteHouse.gov point out that regulatory certainty is still a high priority for digital asset markets. Analysts at Yahoo Finance also point out how a lack of clarity on the CLARITY Act is holding back institutional investment.

Stablecoin Yields Remain Core Dispute

Banks say that yield-paying stablecoins could potentially steer deposits away from banks. They say that this could potentially destabilize lending and the financial system as a whole. Crypto enthusiasts say that rewards on the blockchain are a sign of technological advancement and not a threat to the financial system.

The Digital Chamber said that if banks do not agree to further negotiations, the industry will stick with the current stablecoin yield structure. Carbone called on banking organizations to come back to the negotiating table and work out a compromise.

This is just another reflection of the larger conflict between decentralized finance innovation and the existing financial system. Policymakers have to weigh the need for investor protection, financial system stability, and innovation.

Political Calendar Adds Pressure

Midterm elections loom large over the legislative process. Witt stressed that once political focus shifts fully toward campaigning, passing major crypto legislation will become far more difficult.

The CLARITY Act aims to establish clearer boundaries between securities and commodities regulation in digital assets. Supporters argue that regulatory certainty will drive investment and innovation. Critics caution against rapid approval without extensive review.

Both sides acknowledge that time is short. The coming weeks may determine whether the CLARITY Act advances or stalls indefinitely.

Highlighted Crypto News:

Truth Social Files With SEC to Launch Bitcoin and Ether ETFs on Nasdaq

TagsClarity ACTcrypto firmsCrypto RegulationsStablecoinU.S Congress

Trending Cryptos

Related Questions

QWhat is the main point of contention between the crypto industry and major U.S. banks regarding the CLARITY Act?

AThe main point of contention is the treatment of stablecoin yields. Banks argue that allowing rewards or yield on stablecoins could weaken the traditional deposit system, while the crypto industry defends the innovation and wants flexibility to provide incentives.

QWhat concession did the Digital Chamber's CEO, Cody Carbone, say the crypto industry has already made?

ACody Carbone stated that the crypto industry has already made concessions by limiting features that resemble traditional interest payments.

QAccording to Patrick Witt, why is there urgency for lawmakers to act on the CLARITY Act?

APatrick Witt warned that the legislative window is narrowing as the political focus will soon shift to midterm election campaigns, making it far more difficult to pass major crypto legislation.

QWhat potential risk do banks associate with yield-paying stablecoins?

ABanks say that yield-paying stablecoins could potentially steer deposits away from banks, which could destabilize lending and the financial system as a whole.

QWhat is the stated goal of the CLARITY Act according to the article?

AThe CLARITY Act aims to establish clearer boundaries between securities and commodities regulation in digital assets to provide regulatory certainty that supporters argue will drive investment and innovation.

Related Reads

GPT-5.6 Countdown: Abandon the Illusion of a Single API, Computational Iteration Can't Outpace a Single Page of Compliance

In mid-June, three seemingly independent industry events—the compliance-driven throttling of Fable 5, the open-sourcing of GLM-5.2, and the leaked release timeline for GPT-5.6—are pushing the global AI industry toward a watershed moment. These shifts signal a fundamental restructuring of the industry's underlying logic. First, **"usability" has substantially overtaken "advanced capabilities"** as the primary weight, pushing the global large language model (LLM) supply chain into a "dual-track" phase of controlled closed-source and local open-source coexistence. Second, **the competitive moats of closed-source giants are shifting**. Their technical focus is moving from "language intelligence" toward "spatial intelligence (world models)"—a domain heavily reliant on computing power. Third, faced with常态化 transnational compliance risks, **a "model-agnostic" decoupled design has become a survival necessity for application-layer developers to maintain business continuity.** The article details how Anthropic's Fable 5, despite its advanced engineering feats, was restricted for non-U.S. citizens within 72 hours of launch, highlighting how geopolitical compliance can instantly limit even the most advanced models. In response, the open-source camp, exemplified by Zhipu AI's MIT-licensed GLM-5.2, is gaining market share by offering stable performance improvements and significant cost advantages (up to 70% savings for enterprises), while achieving full adaptation with domestic semiconductor platforms. Meanwhile, closed-source leaders like OpenAI are pivoting. The anticipated GPT-5.6 reportedly shifts focus from language to spatial intelligence and world models, aiming to rebuild a generational gap in areas like 3D understanding, simulation, and industrial design that demand immense compute. The core conclusion is that the LLM supply chain's logic has changed. Enterprises must now evaluate infrastructure based on a composite of technical performance and policy compliance. For developers, complete reliance on a single closed-source API poses unacceptable risk. Implementing a truly model-agnostic architecture—enabling swift switches to compliant, locally deployable open-source alternatives—is no longer just good practice but a fundamental baseline for business continuity.

marsbit49m ago

GPT-5.6 Countdown: Abandon the Illusion of a Single API, Computational Iteration Can't Outpace a Single Page of Compliance

marsbit49m ago

Is the 'Token Subsidy War' Among AI Giants Almost Over?

The article discusses the ongoing "token subsidy war" among AI giants like OpenAI and Anthropic, questioning whether it's nearing its end. It reveals that current AI subscription prices are heavily subsidized, with some plans offering tokens at up to 70 times the actual cost to attract and retain heavy users, especially developers and enterprises. This strategy mirrors past internet-era subsidy battles, but with a key difference: AI tokens lack "lock-in" effects. Unlike ride-hailing or food delivery apps, users can easily switch between AI providers as APIs become standardized, making it difficult for companies to raise prices post-subsidy. The piece highlights a structural asymmetry in the competition. Giants like Google, with massive advertising revenue, can afford to subsidize tokens indefinitely, akin to using "tokens as a weapon." In contrast, venture-backed companies like OpenAI and Anthropic face pressure to become profitable, especially as they approach IPO. The article cites Google Ventures founder Bill Maris, who suggests Google could slash token prices by 80%, putting immense pressure on competitors. Two potential endgames are presented: the "internet service" model (subsidize, monopolize, then raise prices) and the "utility" model (tokens become a standardized, low-margin commodity like electricity). Given the low switching costs, the latter seems more likely. The competition may not have a single winner but could instead accelerate AI's evolution into a foundational, infrastructure-level technology, akin to a public utility. For now, users continue to benefit from heavily subsidized token costs.

marsbit1h ago

Is the 'Token Subsidy War' Among AI Giants Almost Over?

marsbit1h ago

Beyond the Stadium: The Profitable Games Surrounding the World Cup

"Beyond the Pitch: The Profit Game Around the World Cup" The FIFA World Cup transcends being a sporting spectacle, evolving into a massive global arena for speculation and profit-seeking. The 2026 tournament has amplified this dynamic, creating a multi-layered ecosystem of financial opportunism alongside the football. **Prediction markets** have surged into the mainstream. Platforms like Polymarket and Kalshi saw trading volumes for World Cup contracts soar, attracting new users with their financial trading model and high-profile, chain-based wealth stories that overshadow traditional sports betting in terms of growth and narrative. However, **traditional sportsbooks** remain the dominant force, leveraging established user habits, legal markets, and comprehensive product offerings to handle the vast majority of speculative wagers, with projections suggesting record-breaking betting volumes. Capital markets also react. **"Concept stocks"** in countries like South Korea and Japan experience volatile price swings based on team performance and anticipated fan spending on items like chicken, beer, and viewing parties, effectively becoming a stock market reflecting fan sentiment. The **ticket resale market** has become a sophisticated arena for arbitrage. Prices fluctuate wildly based on team draws and star power, with sellers sometimes listing tickets they don't yet own in a practice akin to short-selling, while FIFA's own "Right to Buy" tokens add another layer of speculative trading. **Collectibles and merchandise** offer another avenue. Panini sticker albums, with their inherent scarcity and nostalgic value, can become high-value collectibles. Limited-edition or locally themed jerseys command significant premiums on secondary markets, and even counterfeit vendors profit from fans' desire for affordable match-day identity. The **cryptocurrency** space has seen a frenzy of speculative, unauthorized World Cup-themed meme coins on chains like Solana. These tokens, often exploiting team names and player imagery, experience extreme pump-and-dump cycles, creating stories of massive gains for a few early entrants and steep losses for many others. Finally, an entire industry thrives on **providing information and tools** to other speculators. Developers create platforms like SeatSidekick to track ticket inventory and prices, while paid Telegram groups and subscriptions sell betting tips and predictions, monetizing the widespread desire for an informational edge. In essence, the World Cup has become a compressed, global laboratory for speculation. While the games determine champions on the field, a parallel, complex network of financial transactions—spanning prediction contracts, bets, stocks, tickets, collectibles, crypto, and information services—settles its own scores in the global market.

marsbit1h ago

Beyond the Stadium: The Profitable Games Surrounding the World Cup

marsbit1h ago

How Does Codex Use a Computer? Three Entry Points and Permission Boundaries

This article explains the three primary methods for Codex to interact with a computer, each with distinct use cases, permission boundaries, and trust levels. **1. Computer Use:** This offers the broadest access, allowing Codex to visually control and interact with the graphical user interface of authorized macOS/Windows apps, system settings, and even iOS simulators. It's ideal for tasks lacking APIs or structured tools, such as operating legacy software or multi-app workflows. However, it's the slowest method and has the widest permission scope, requiring careful supervision for sensitive actions. **2. Chrome Extension:** This grants Codex access to the user's logged-in Chrome browser state, including cookies, profiles, and open tabs. It's best for tasks requiring user identity across websites like Gmail, LinkedIn, Salesforce, or internal dashboards. Its key advantage is multi-tab control for complex workflows. While more powerful for browser-based tasks than Computer Use, it carries higher sensitivity as actions are performed under the user's identity. **3. In-App Browser:** This is a browser isolated within the Codex thread, separate from the user's personal browsing data. It excels in web development and debugging scenarios—previewing local servers, testing responsive layouts, or annotating designs directly on the page. Its isolation is a strength for development but a limitation for tasks requiring login sessions. The core principle is to choose the narrowest, safest, and most structured interface for the task. Use plugins or MCPs first, resort to visual control (Computer Use) only for GUI-dependent tasks, employ the Chrome extension for identity-reliant browser work, and prefer the In-App Browser for isolated development. **Appshots** are clarified as a fourth, complementary tool for *inputting* context—capturing a screenshot of a window to point Codex to something—rather than a method for Codex to *act*. Together, this layered approach highlights a key to AI agent productization: not granting unlimited permissions, but constraining them within clear boundaries for specific tasks while preserving user oversight.

marsbit3h ago

How Does Codex Use a Computer? Three Entry Points and Permission Boundaries

marsbit3h ago

Trading

Spot
Futures

Hot Articles

What is $BANK

Bank AI: A Revolutionary Step in the Future of Banking Introduction In an era marked by rapid advancements in technology, Bank AI stands at the intersection of artificial intelligence (AI) and banking services. This innovative project seeks to redefine the financial landscape, enhancing operational efficiency, security measures, and customer experiences through the power of AI. As we embark on this exploration of Bank AI, we will delve into what the project entails, its operational dynamics, its historical context, and significant milestones. What is Bank AI? At its core, Bank AI represents a transformative initiative aimed at integrating artificial intelligence into various banking operations. This project harnesses the capabilities of AI to automate processes, improve risk management protocols, and enhance customer interaction through personalised services. The primary objectives of Bank AI include: Automation of Banking Functions: By leveraging AI technologies, Bank AI aims to automate routine tasks, reducing the burden on human resources and enhancing efficiency. Enhanced Risk Management: The project utilises AI algorithms to predict and identify risks, thereby fortifying security measures against fraud and other threats. Personalisation of Banking Services: Bank AI focuses on offering tailored financial products and services by analysing customer data and behaviours. Improving Customer Experience: The implementation of AI-driven solutions, such as chatbots and virtual assistants, aims to provide users with more human-like interactions, revolutionising the way customers engage with banks. With these goals, Bank AI positions itself as a crucial player in rendering banking more efficient, secure, and user-centric. Who is the Creator of Bank AI? Details regarding the creator of Bank AI remain unknown. As such, no specific individual or organisation has been identified in the available information. The anonymity surrounding the project's inception raises questions but does not detract from its ambitious vision and objectives. Who are the Investors of Bank AI? Similar to the project's creator, specific information regarding the investors or supporting organisations of Bank AI has not been disclosed. Without this information, it is challenging to outline the financial backing and institutional support that might be propelling the project forward. Nevertheless, the importance of having a robust investment foundation is pivotal for sustaining development in such an innovative field. How Does Bank AI Work? Bank AI operates on several innovative fronts, focusing on unique factors that differentiate it from traditional banking frameworks. Below are key operational features: Automation: By applying machine learning algorithms, Bank AI automates various manual processes within banks. This results in reduced operational costs and allows human workers to redirect their efforts towards more strategic activities. Advanced Risk Management: The integration of AI into risk management practices equips banks with tools to accurately predict potential threats such as fraud, ensuring that customer information and assets remain secure. Tailored Financial Recommendations: Through continuous learning from customer interactions, the AI systems develop a nuanced understanding of user needs, enabling them to offer tailored advice on financial decisions. Enhanced Customer Interactions: Utilizing chatbots and virtual assistants powered by AI, Bank AI enables a more engaging customer experience, allowing users to have their queries resolved quickly, thus reducing wait times and improving satisfaction levels. Together, these operational features position Bank AI as a pioneer in the banking sector, establishing new benchmarks for service delivery and operational excellence. Timeline of Bank AI Understanding the trajectory of Bank AI requires a look at its historical context. Below is a timeline highlighting important milestones and developments: Early 2010s: The conceptualisation of AI integration into banking services began to gain attention as banking institutions recognised the potential benefits. 2018: A marked increase in the implementation of AI technologies occurred when banks started using AI tools like chatbots for basic customer service and risk management systems for improved security handling. 2023: The sophistication of AI continued to advance, with generative AI being introduced for more complex tasks such as document processing and real-time investment analysis. This year marked a significant leap in the capabilities afforded to banks by AI technology. 2024-Current Status: As of this year, Bank AI is on an upward trajectory, with ongoing research and developments poised to further enhance capabilities in banking operations. Continued exploration of AI applications hints at exciting developments yet to come. Key Points About Bank AI Integration of AI in Banking: Bank AI focuses on adopting artificial intelligence to streamline banking processes and improve user experiences. Automation and Risk Management Focus: The project strongly emphasises these areas, aiming to shift the burden of routine tasks while enhancing security frameworks through predictive analytics. Personalised Banking Solutions: By harnessing customer data, Bank AI enables tailored banking services that cater to individual user needs. Commitment to Development: Bank AI remains committed to ongoing research and development efforts, ensuring its adaptability and ongoing relevance as technology continues to evolve. Conclusion In summary, Bank AI exemplifies a crucial step forward in the banking industry, leveraging artificial intelligence to reshape operational paradigms, enhance security, and promote customer satisfaction. Despite gaps in information surrounding the creator and investors, the clear objectives and functional mechanisms of Bank AI provide a strong foundation for its ongoing evolution. As AI technology continues to advance and merge with the banking sector, Bank AI is well-positioned to significantly impact the future of financial services, enhancing the way we understand and interact with banking.

161 Total ViewsPublished 2024.04.06Updated 2024.12.03

What is $BANK

Discussions

Welcome to the HTX Community. Here, you can stay informed about the latest platform developments and gain access to professional market insights. Users' opinions on the price of BANK (BANK) are presented below.

活动图片